BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus is an important risk factor in the development of coronary artery disease (CAD) and is often associated with severe disease. However, this risk is not uniform, some patients remain free of CAD even after many years of treatment for diabetes. The present study was aimed to identify the factors that are associated with a favorable CAD profile.MethodsA case–control study of 76 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were on treatment for more than 10 years duration and undergoing a coronary angiogram for the evaluation of clinically suspected CAD at a tertiary care hospital were recruited for the study. The presence and absence of significant CAD was determined after a coronary angiogram. Clinical history, and anthropometric and biochemical parameters were analyzed. Insulin resistance was determined by the Homeostasis Model Assessment. Multiple logistic regressions were done to find out the factors associated for a favorable CAD profile.ResultsThe difference in HOMA-IR (2.37 ± 0.69 VS 3.77 ± 1.64, p < 0.001) and urine microalbumin (24.15 ± 32.16 VS 82.72 ± 117.70, p = 0.004) were found to be statistically significant among those who did not have CAD when compared to those who had CAD. The difference in lipid profile, HbA1C, fasting blood sugar, BMI, waist hip ratio, waist and hip circumference was not significant. The adjusted odds ratio for insulin resistance less than 2.5 (OR 9.09, 95 % CI 1.91–41.83, p = 0.005), females (OR 7.91, 95 % CI 1.55–40.38, p = 0.013) and microalbumin <20 mg/l (OR 4.57, 95 % CI 1.17–17.85, p = 0.029) were independently associated with normal coronaries. The adjusted odds ratio for lipid profile, BMI, blood pressure and HbA1C were not significant.ConclusionsHOMA-IR less than 2.5, microalbuminuria less than 20 mg/l and females are the factors appear to be associated with no apparent CAD.
BackgroundThere is a substantial reduction in cardiovascular related morbidity and mortality in the general population attributed to improved treatment of cardiac risk factors and disease, the same magnitude of benefit has not been observed in those with diabetes mellitus. The aim of the present study was to evaluate factors associated with the cardiac outcome at 1 year after coronary angiogram in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and to compare the outcomes with nondiabetics.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was carried out in subjects who underwent coronary angiogram for an evaluation of CAD, with follow-up data available for period of 12 months. The data consisted of 208 type 2 diabetic and 75 non-diabetic patients. Clinical, anthropometric and other biochemical risk factors of the study participants were recorded. Univariate and multivariate cox proportional hazard regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relation between the cardiovascular risk factors and major adverse cardiac events (MACE).ResultsAt 1 year, MACE was observed in 50 (24.04%) type 2 diabetic subjects, which included non-fatal myocardial infarction 24 (11.54%), target vessel revascularization 15 (7.21%) and death 11 (5.29%). The area under the curve for insulin in predicting MACE was found to be 0.81 (95% CI 0.73–0.88) with sensitivity and specificity of 88% (95% CI 0.71–0.96) and 74% (95% CI 0.65–0.81) respectively. After adjustment for potential confounders hyperinsulinemia (>20 µIU/ml) was significantly associated with MACE [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 3.03, 95% CI 1.41–6.54, p = 0.005]. Interestingly, the MACE rate in type 2 diabetics with insulin levels <20 µIU/ml (10.2%) and non-diabetics (12%) (p = 0.676) appears to be same.ConclusionsIn addition to severity of the CAD at the baseline, basal hyperinsulinemia beyond a threshold strongly predicts adverse cardiac events at 1 year in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Those below the threshold, appears to be having a risk equivalent to non-diabetics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.